6 ms·

How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

81 points by vilgax 13y ago

enscr 13y ago
What list is MG Siegler on?
- leoc 13y ago
  One of the linked articles http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/16/apple-public-relations-new-media-pecking-order/ http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/16/apple-public-relation... suggests he's on the team, or at least was last year.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- epo 13y ago
  Tries to compare Apple's behaviour to McCarthyism. Hilarious really, the kind of paranoid, whining nonsense that is only taken seriously by witless Apple haters, the sort that downvoted you without comment, presumably.
  - leoc 13y ago
    Why do you think the comparison to McCarthyism is incorrect or inappropriate, let alone laughable? Please note that OP didn't say that Apple's blacklist makes it just as bad as HUAC or Uncle Joe.
  - Iftheshoefits 13y ago
    Of course the author himself notes that a direct comparison is absurd, and that the examples from the Red Scare are illustrative of the purpose and historical context for blacklist. Perhaps you were a bit hasty in calling others witless.
dxm 13y ago
Gosh. If I could laugh I would have been doubled over. Does the author really think that Apple put this much thought into not letting certain journalists into new coverage. This is pretty much a thought of a conspiracy theorist, Apple surely doesn't think about communist conspiracies from the 1940s, they merely think you're either a bad journalist or one who is consistently unfair. The detail in which the linked article puts forth is ridiculous. It's over-analysis at it's most laughable.
- walshemj 13y ago
  Companies do maintain black lists in the same way that Hollywood did in response to McCarthy and there is a small industry of "research" to did out info on peoples political and other activities eg raising H&S issues The construction industry has been doing this for decades in the UK and I bet companies like walmart do it in the USA as well. If you dont see the problem you need to read up on the industrial history of the USA
- dmethvin 13y ago
  If you know anything about big companies and PR, you would know that much of what he says is true. They do indeed monitor what various media outlets say and create an "enemies list" that will be starved. Even big and influential media may not escape. Apple doesn't need to cooperate with the normal reporters on the New York Times who ask hard questions about conditions in Chinese factories, they just need to court David Pogue.
- bnegreve 13y ago
  > Does the author really think that Apple put this much thought into not letting certain journalists into new coverage. Techniques to control public image over social networks are getting more and more attention. For example academic papers here: [1]. Of course I don't know about Apple in particular, but really doubt that they don't look into this "just because". [1] http://icdm2012.ua.ac.be/content/session?id=15 http://icdm2012.ua.ac.be/content/session?id=15
- Shamanmuni 13y ago
  So, are you saying that Apple, probably one of the most secretive and PR savvy companies in the world, doesn't give much thought about its relations with the media? Really? The article wasn't talking about a conspiracy, read it again. It's just what you said, Apple doing PR control. If they think that criticisng Apple or its products makes someone a bad journalist or unfair and they are blacklisted, then in actuality they do care a lot about journalists. A tech journalist is at a disadvantage with the rest if he is denied early access to products, and he won't get that unless he writes pretty things about Apple. We have a word for that: blackmail.
stevebennso 13y ago
Is this a problem? If you write articles saying that you don't like me, I probably won't send you any free stuff or invite you round to my house. They're a consumer electronics and software company, not a government department. If they don't want to talk to you or send you any free stuff, that's up to them and I'm 100% fine with that. Why do you need to visit them or get free equipment from them to write articles anyway? Wait for it to be released to the public like everyone else.
- mansr 13y ago
  Public perception is influenced by the first reviews published on a new product. If you give a few known friendly writers early access, there will be a few days of nothing but positive reporting. Mainstream media will then pick this up as "overwhelmingly positive" response to the new thing. Of course Apple has the right to behave like this. Nevertheless, it's good for consumers to know that the early reviews are carefully shaped, so if you want a balanced picture, you need to wait until after the public release.
  - nknighthb 13y ago
    Uh, who exactly doesn't realize all companies try to control press coverage? Controlling perceptions is the concise version of a PR job description.
    - deathcakes 13y ago
      This, exactly. Not really sure why this is such a revelation.
  - Iftheshoefits 13y ago
    Apple's target market doesn't give a shit about anybody's reviews of their new products. Their target market will buy whatever new products they produce simply because of the Apple logo on it.
    - enraged_camel 13y ago
k-mcgrady 13y ago
>> "If wasn’t on Apple’s “blacklist” already, this post would surely get me on it. It’s totally worth it." Really? You make money writing about Apple and you think it would be worth it to intentionally piss them off and get blacklisted? I can understand writing a bad article about a bad product and getting blacklisted because you don't want to lie in a review but a conspiracy piece that also mentions how the Chinese government jails journalists makes you look worse than Apple. If I was in charge of giving out invites to journalists at Apple I'd exclude you, not because you wrote something negative, but because you wrote something really over the top and pretty crazy.
schrototo 13y ago
He's putting himself on my blacklist by using OnSwipe. How is that shit not dead yet?
- thedrbrian 13y ago
  You can get rid of it by blocking onswipe.com . But then again you lose the useful filter of seeing which websites still use it.
- chrismonsanto 13y ago
  What is OnSwipe and why is it so bad? Never heard of it until now. I'm not even sure what it is from the front page of their website.
  - graeme 13y ago
    it's a tablet version of sites with horrible usability.
  - weaksauce 13y ago
    It's the terrible software that they are using to cripple the web interface in tablets. The browser on my iPad is great... No need to paginate with swipes.
  - nknighthb 13y ago
    A shitty, laggy, memory-eating UI for mobile/touchscreen devices that people who have absolutely never used a tablet put on their websites thinking it makes them cool. In reality, it is a sort of reverse-DDoS on mobile web users. I assume it's really a secret plot by Microsoft to make the mobile web unusable and drive everybody back to PCs where they're still semi-competitive.
    - tptacek 13y ago
      Ok, now, can someone demonstrate some insight and/or thoughtfulness by explaining what OnSwipe is supposed to be? Their offices are next door to ours at Union Square, and the people that work there do not appear to be assholes hell-bent on ruining your mobile browsing experience. I'm not sticking up for OnSwipe, but this litany of "OnSwipe is evil" has become something of a religious ritual on HN, and for once I'd like to see if we can do better than a mindless chant. What do we think the people who work at OnSwipe are setting out to do?
leoc 13y ago
I remember Engadget being "asked" to stop covering jailbreak-requiring iPhone apps.
mbennett 13y ago
Reminds me of when CNET was blacklisted by Google for publishing Schmidt's personal info that was available on Google searches after he downplayed privacy. http://boingboing.net/2009/12/09/google-ceo-says-priv.html http://boingboing.net/2009/12/09/google-ceo-says-priv.html
byteofprash 13y ago
'He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.' - George Orwell.
neya 13y ago
Apple has a long history of manipulating the press in other ways too.[1][2] So, this doesn't really surprise me. [1]http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/apple-prs-dirty-little-secret/12291 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/apple-prs-dirty-little-secre... [2]http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/how_apple_does_controlled_leaks/ http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/how_apple_does_contro...
- coldtea 13y ago
  Controlled leaks and a blacklist. Isn't this what EVERY company on earth does? Also: it's not a blacklist as he describes it. It's a WHITE-list, since there are people (like Grubber or Pogue I guess) that get stuff earlier. It's not like Apple people give interviews etc to anyone -- so it's not like there's a blacklist of people not getting access. There's just a whitelist of people having early access. I've seen this from MS, Adobe, Google, Canon and generally tons of other companies.
foobarqux 13y ago
Now consider how the government does the same thing to the press and how it affects political coverage especially the notion that the media is a check on power.
mstolpm 13y ago
Having working with PR departments of various companies, almost all had some sort of blacklisting/whitelisting for journalists and media outlets. Seems to be perfectly normal because the job of those departments is to influence media coverage to be positive and widespread. Working with some journalists is more effective than working with others and some have proven in the past to not be worth spending time (and money) on. Mike Elgan concludes: "Ultimately, it’s not that big of a deal." True, but then readers should ask: Why is he writing a big column singling out Apple for this behavior? Eyeballs?
- Semaphor 13y ago
  In general: > […]you should know about it so you can be a better-informed media “consumer” and consumer electronics customer. Why he is singling out Apple, my guess would be because it's an Apple news site?
ryguytilidie 13y ago
I was with him on the "blacklisting people in the press is bad" thing. When he started comparing it to the red scare you really have to worry about his connection to reality.
- chadwickthebold 13y ago
  Further down... "It needs to be said, of course, that comparisons between, say, McCarthyism and Apple’s PR strategy are absurd. I make them here only to illustrate the history and purpose of blacklisting."
  - jmspring 13y ago
    "It needs to be said..." After spending several paragraphs mentioning the most egregious black list example in US history. Sorry, but "this is just an illustration" is just a cop out given the example was there to set a particular tone. The article could have been written without the extremes of prior examples.
    - vinceguidry 13y ago
      The longer you read the article, the further and further he gets from accusing Apple of anything, really. He's quick to point out that the blacklist tactic shouldn't affect how you see the tech press. Towards the end he admits that the difference between a whitelisted journalist and a blacklisted one is practically nil. Read between the lines and you see it's just a matter of status and pride. You get one kind by being on the blacklist and another by being on the whitelist. The author is clear which side he'd rather be on. And that's the real point of the article. To show off how 'independent' he is by daring to compare Apple to Joseph McCarthy.
      - jmspring 13y ago
        I caught a bit of the same, it felt like the introductory paragraphs were really meant for sensationalism and to create some buzz, which probably worked.
pg 13y ago
In every field there are dishonest people you want to avoid dealing with. So I'm sure every company more than about a year or two old has encountered reporters they'd never want to talk to again, beyond things like press releases that go to everyone.
- FireBeyond 13y ago
  There's a bit more to it than that. Apple blacklists reporters and publications that are -critical-, not (just) dishonest.
Bulkington 13y ago
Trade journo here (not tech). No need for blacklists in some/many/most segments. Upset corp. hatchetman calls publisher, says either the offending reporter goes or our ads do. I haven't seen a whole lot of publishing backbone/pushback out here lately. (Not that that's changed much.) Flipside is fancy junketeering, with publishers letting corporations host journos for new product events or 'market updates' held in resort destinations. That's the list journos want to be on, 'but it doesn't impact our objectivity.'

81 points by vilgax 13y ago

enscr 13y ago

What list is MG Siegler on?

leoc 13y ago
One of the linked articles http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/16/apple-public-relations-new-media-pecking-order/ http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/16/apple-public-relation... suggests he's on the team, or at least was last year.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

epo 13y ago
Tries to compare Apple's behaviour to McCarthyism. Hilarious really, the kind of paranoid, whining nonsense that is only taken seriously by witless Apple haters, the sort that downvoted you without comment, presumably.
- leoc 13y ago
  Why do you think the comparison to McCarthyism is incorrect or inappropriate, let alone laughable? Please note that OP didn't say that Apple's blacklist makes it just as bad as HUAC or Uncle Joe.
- Iftheshoefits 13y ago
  Of course the author himself notes that a direct comparison is absurd, and that the examples from the Red Scare are illustrative of the purpose and historical context for blacklist. Perhaps you were a bit hasty in calling others witless.

dxm 13y ago

Gosh. If I could laugh I would have been doubled over. Does the author really think that Apple put this much thought into not letting certain journalists into new coverage. This is pretty much a thought of a conspiracy theorist, Apple surely doesn't think about communist conspiracies from the 1940s, they merely think you're either a bad journalist or one who is consistently unfair. The detail in which the linked article puts forth is ridiculous. It's over-analysis at it's most laughable.

walshemj 13y ago
Companies do maintain black lists in the same way that Hollywood did in response to McCarthy and there is a small industry of "research" to did out info on peoples political and other activities eg raising H&S issues The construction industry has been doing this for decades in the UK and I bet companies like walmart do it in the USA as well. If you dont see the problem you need to read up on the industrial history of the USA
dmethvin 13y ago
If you know anything about big companies and PR, you would know that much of what he says is true. They do indeed monitor what various media outlets say and create an "enemies list" that will be starved. Even big and influential media may not escape. Apple doesn't need to cooperate with the normal reporters on the New York Times who ask hard questions about conditions in Chinese factories, they just need to court David Pogue.
bnegreve 13y ago
> Does the author really think that Apple put this much thought into not letting certain journalists into new coverage. Techniques to control public image over social networks are getting more and more attention. For example academic papers here: [1]. Of course I don't know about Apple in particular, but really doubt that they don't look into this "just because". [1] http://icdm2012.ua.ac.be/content/session?id=15 http://icdm2012.ua.ac.be/content/session?id=15
Shamanmuni 13y ago
So, are you saying that Apple, probably one of the most secretive and PR savvy companies in the world, doesn't give much thought about its relations with the media? Really? The article wasn't talking about a conspiracy, read it again. It's just what you said, Apple doing PR control. If they think that criticisng Apple or its products makes someone a bad journalist or unfair and they are blacklisted, then in actuality they do care a lot about journalists. A tech journalist is at a disadvantage with the rest if he is denied early access to products, and he won't get that unless he writes pretty things about Apple. We have a word for that: blackmail.

stevebennso 13y ago

Is this a problem? If you write articles saying that you don't like me, I probably won't send you any free stuff or invite you round to my house. They're a consumer electronics and software company, not a government department. If they don't want to talk to you or send you any free stuff, that's up to them and I'm 100% fine with that. Why do you need to visit them or get free equipment from them to write articles anyway? Wait for it to be released to the public like everyone else.

mansr 13y ago
Public perception is influenced by the first reviews published on a new product. If you give a few known friendly writers early access, there will be a few days of nothing but positive reporting. Mainstream media will then pick this up as "overwhelmingly positive" response to the new thing. Of course Apple has the right to behave like this. Nevertheless, it's good for consumers to know that the early reviews are carefully shaped, so if you want a balanced picture, you need to wait until after the public release.
- nknighthb 13y ago
  Uh, who exactly doesn't realize all companies try to control press coverage? Controlling perceptions is the concise version of a PR job description.
  - deathcakes 13y ago
    This, exactly. Not really sure why this is such a revelation.
- Iftheshoefits 13y ago
  Apple's target market doesn't give a shit about anybody's reviews of their new products. Their target market will buy whatever new products they produce simply because of the Apple logo on it.
  - enraged_camel 13y ago

k-mcgrady 13y ago

>> "If wasn’t on Apple’s “blacklist” already, this post would surely get me on it. It’s totally worth it." Really? You make money writing about Apple and you think it would be worth it to intentionally piss them off and get blacklisted? I can understand writing a bad article about a bad product and getting blacklisted because you don't want to lie in a review but a conspiracy piece that also mentions how the Chinese government jails journalists makes you look worse than Apple. If I was in charge of giving out invites to journalists at Apple I'd exclude you, not because you wrote something negative, but because you wrote something really over the top and pretty crazy.

schrototo 13y ago

He's putting himself on my blacklist by using OnSwipe. How is that shit not dead yet?

thedrbrian 13y ago
You can get rid of it by blocking onswipe.com . But then again you lose the useful filter of seeing which websites still use it.
chrismonsanto 13y ago
What is OnSwipe and why is it so bad? Never heard of it until now. I'm not even sure what it is from the front page of their website.
- graeme 13y ago
  it's a tablet version of sites with horrible usability.
- weaksauce 13y ago
  It's the terrible software that they are using to cripple the web interface in tablets. The browser on my iPad is great... No need to paginate with swipes.
- nknighthb 13y ago
  A shitty, laggy, memory-eating UI for mobile/touchscreen devices that people who have absolutely never used a tablet put on their websites thinking it makes them cool. In reality, it is a sort of reverse-DDoS on mobile web users. I assume it's really a secret plot by Microsoft to make the mobile web unusable and drive everybody back to PCs where they're still semi-competitive.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    Ok, now, can someone demonstrate some insight and/or thoughtfulness by explaining what OnSwipe is supposed to be? Their offices are next door to ours at Union Square, and the people that work there do not appear to be assholes hell-bent on ruining your mobile browsing experience. I'm not sticking up for OnSwipe, but this litany of "OnSwipe is evil" has become something of a religious ritual on HN, and for once I'd like to see if we can do better than a mindless chant. What do we think the people who work at OnSwipe are setting out to do?

leoc 13y ago

I remember Engadget being "asked" to stop covering jailbreak-requiring iPhone apps.

mbennett 13y ago

Reminds me of when CNET was blacklisted by Google for publishing Schmidt's personal info that was available on Google searches after he downplayed privacy. http://boingboing.net/2009/12/09/google-ceo-says-priv.html http://boingboing.net/2009/12/09/google-ceo-says-priv.html

byteofprash 13y ago

'He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.' - George Orwell.

neya 13y ago

Apple has a long history of manipulating the press in other ways too.[1][2] So, this doesn't really surprise me. [1]http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/apple-prs-dirty-little-secret/12291 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/apple-prs-dirty-little-secre... [2]http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/how_apple_does_controlled_leaks/ http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/how_apple_does_contro...

coldtea 13y ago
Controlled leaks and a blacklist. Isn't this what EVERY company on earth does? Also: it's not a blacklist as he describes it. It's a WHITE-list, since there are people (like Grubber or Pogue I guess) that get stuff earlier. It's not like Apple people give interviews etc to anyone -- so it's not like there's a blacklist of people not getting access. There's just a whitelist of people having early access. I've seen this from MS, Adobe, Google, Canon and generally tons of other companies.

foobarqux 13y ago

Now consider how the government does the same thing to the press and how it affects political coverage especially the notion that the media is a check on power.

mstolpm 13y ago

Having working with PR departments of various companies, almost all had some sort of blacklisting/whitelisting for journalists and media outlets. Seems to be perfectly normal because the job of those departments is to influence media coverage to be positive and widespread. Working with some journalists is more effective than working with others and some have proven in the past to not be worth spending time (and money) on. Mike Elgan concludes: "Ultimately, it’s not that big of a deal." True, but then readers should ask: Why is he writing a big column singling out Apple for this behavior? Eyeballs?

Semaphor 13y ago
In general: > […]you should know about it so you can be a better-informed media “consumer” and consumer electronics customer. Why he is singling out Apple, my guess would be because it's an Apple news site?

ryguytilidie 13y ago

I was with him on the "blacklisting people in the press is bad" thing. When he started comparing it to the red scare you really have to worry about his connection to reality.

chadwickthebold 13y ago
Further down... "It needs to be said, of course, that comparisons between, say, McCarthyism and Apple’s PR strategy are absurd. I make them here only to illustrate the history and purpose of blacklisting."
- jmspring 13y ago
  "It needs to be said..." After spending several paragraphs mentioning the most egregious black list example in US history. Sorry, but "this is just an illustration" is just a cop out given the example was there to set a particular tone. The article could have been written without the extremes of prior examples.
  - vinceguidry 13y ago
    The longer you read the article, the further and further he gets from accusing Apple of anything, really. He's quick to point out that the blacklist tactic shouldn't affect how you see the tech press. Towards the end he admits that the difference between a whitelisted journalist and a blacklisted one is practically nil. Read between the lines and you see it's just a matter of status and pride. You get one kind by being on the blacklist and another by being on the whitelist. The author is clear which side he'd rather be on. And that's the real point of the article. To show off how 'independent' he is by daring to compare Apple to Joseph McCarthy.
    - jmspring 13y ago
      I caught a bit of the same, it felt like the introductory paragraphs were really meant for sensationalism and to create some buzz, which probably worked.

pg 13y ago

In every field there are dishonest people you want to avoid dealing with. So I'm sure every company more than about a year or two old has encountered reporters they'd never want to talk to again, beyond things like press releases that go to everyone.

FireBeyond 13y ago
There's a bit more to it than that. Apple blacklists reporters and publications that are -critical-, not (just) dishonest.

Bulkington 13y ago

Trade journo here (not tech). No need for blacklists in some/many/most segments. Upset corp. hatchetman calls publisher, says either the offending reporter goes or our ads do. I haven't seen a whole lot of publishing backbone/pushback out here lately. (Not that that's changed much.) Flipside is fancy junketeering, with publishers letting corporations host journos for new product events or 'market updates' held in resort destinations. That's the list journos want to be on, 'but it doesn't impact our objectivity.'